Comparison of viraemia and nasal shedding after PRRSV-1 challenge following vaccination with three commercially available PRRS modified live virus vaccines.

The effectiveness of three Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS) Modified Live Virus (MLV) vaccines against PRRSV viraemia and nasal shedding following experimental challenge was compared. The study comprised a negative control (T01), and three treatment groups (T02, T03 and T04) each vaccinated with a single dose of a commercial PRRS MLV vaccine, given in accordance with the vaccine's Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC). Pigs aged 21 days were vaccinated (day 0), challenged intranasally (day 28) with heterologous PRRSV-1-1 strain Olot/91, then monitored for PRRSV viraemia and nasal shedding for 12 days. After challenge, pigs were viraemic on fewer days in group T04 (0.67) than groups T01 (0.91), T02 (0.81) and T03 (0.97) (P < 0.0296). From day 34, inclusive, serum PRRSV titres were lower in group T04 than negative controls (P ≤ 0.0001) and groups T02 and T03 (P ≤ 0.0047); serum PRRSV titre Area Under the Curve (AUC) for group T04 (42.34) was lower than in T01 (65.49), T02 (60.67) and T03 (67.38) (P < 0.0100); pigs exhibited nasal shedding on fewer days in group T04 (0.40) than T01 (0.78), T02 (0.64) and T03 (0.56) (P < 0.0101); and nasal shedding AUC for group T04 (8.52) was lower than in groups T01 (23.59, P < 0.0001) and T02 (19.37, P = 0.0001). The ability of PRRS MLV vaccines to reduce the duration of viraemia and nasal shedding after intranasal challenge with a heterologous PRRSV-1-1 strain differ significantly.

The efficacy and performance impact of Fostera PRRS in a Vietnamese commercial pig farm naturally challenged by a highly pathogenic PRRS virus.

Highly pathogenic porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (HP-PRRSV) is characterized by high fever, respiratory distress, and high mortality in pigs of all ages and has severely affected the Vietnam pork industry in recent years. The study was conducted to compare the efficacy, safety, and overall performance of a modified live PRRSV-2 vaccine (Fostera PRRS) to an existing PRRSV modified live vaccine on a farm with a recent history of HP-PRRSV-associated respiratory diseases. A total of 351 pigs were randomly allocated to three treatment groups: (i) vaccinated with Fostera PRRS at 1 day of age (n = 118), (ii) vaccinated with Fostera PRRS (n = 118) at 21 days of age, and (iii) vaccinated with Amervac PRRS (n = 115) at 21 days of age. The Fostera PRRS vaccinated pigs had milder clinical symptoms, lower levels of HP-PRRSV viremia, fewer pathological changes in the lung, and higher body weight gain at the end of the study compared with the Amervac PRRS group. Vaccination of pigs with Fostera PRRS at 1 day of age also significantly reduced viral loads in their blood (P < 0.05) and induced higher anti-PRRSV antibody titers (P < 0.01) compared with pigs vaccinated with Amervac PRRS at 21 days of age. Fostera PRRS vaccination at 1 day of age can be useful in protecting young piglets from early HP-PRRSV infection because the immunized pigs were marketed 20 days earlier than their peers immunized at 21-day old as they reached the target market weight earlier in this study.

Efficacy evaluation of three modified-live PRRS vaccines against a local strain of highly pathogenic porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus.

Highly pathogenic porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (HP-PRRSV) is characterized by high fever and high mortality in pigs of all ages and has severely affected the pork industry of China in the last decades. This study evaluated the differences in protection conferred by of three MLV PRRS vaccines derived from classical PRRSV (C-PRRSV, VR2332) and HP-PRRSV (TJM-F92 and JXA1-R) against the field challenge of HP-PRRSV TP strain (JXA1-R like). Compared to the experiment pigs in control group which were vaccinated with normal saline, the MLV PRRS vaccinated pigs had milder clinical symptoms, fewer pathological changes in the lung, and higher body weight gain at the end of the study. However, piglets vaccinated with VR2332 had higher body temperature, higher viral loads and lower body weight gain when compared with piglets vaccinated with TJM-F92 or JXA1-R vaccines at the end of the study. The results demonstrated that VR2332 vaccine provided a limited cross-protection against the HP-PRRSV TP strain infection, while in contrast the TJM-F92 and JXA1-R vaccines provided more efficacious protection. The findings of this study could serve as a valuable reference guide for the pig producers and veterinarians when considering the choice of which type of MLV PRRS vaccines to protect their pig herds against field challenge by HP-PRRSV TP strain.